MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400005137 · doi:10.1002/adma.202405930

High‐Lactate‐Metabolizing Photosynthetic Bacteria Reprogram Tumor Immune Microenvironment

2024· article· en· W4400005137 on OpenAlexaff
Yichuan Ma, Yujing Hu, Huifang Liu, Xiaoya Li, Yuanhang Li, Yu Zhao, Qi Zhang, Ziyang Zhang, Qingqing Leng, Li Luo, Lanya Li, Yunlu Dai, Guojun Chen, Jinchao Zhang, Zhenhua Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHebei UniversityScience Fund for Creative Research GroupsNatural Science Foundation of Hebei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTumor microenvironmentImmunotherapyImmune systemReprogrammingBiologyCancer researchBacteriaTumor cellsCellImmunologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The elevated levels of lactate in tumor tissue play a pivotal role in fostering an immunosuppressive microenvironment. Therefore, efficiently reducing lactate levels to reprogram tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) is considered a crucial step for boosted immunotherapy. Here, a high-lactate-metabolizing photosynthetic bacteria (LAB-1) is selectively screened for TIM reprogramming, which then improves the efficacy of tumor immunotherapy. The culture medium for LAB-1 screening is initially developed through an orthogonal experiment, simulating the tumor microenvironment (TME) and utilizing lactate as the sole organic carbon source. As demonstrated in a murine 4T1 model, LAB-1 colonizes the TME selectively, resulting in a significant reduction in lactate levels and a subsequent increase in pH values within the tumor tissue. Furthermore, single-cell RNA sequencing analysis reveals that LAB-1 effectively reprograms the TIM, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of antitumor immune therapy. This approach of utilizing lactate-consuming bacteria represents a potent tool for augmenting tumor immunotherapy efficiency.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced MaterialsSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207